Publishers Weekly
06/07/2021
UC Berkeley law school dean Chemerinsky (We the People) delivers a sharp and timely critique of the Supreme Court for “favor the interests of law enforcement over the rights of individuals.” By undermining constitutional protections against self-incrimination and unreasonable government searches and seizures, Chemerinsky argues, the court has helped create a racist criminal justice system that fails to hold police accountable for their misconduct. He delves into the 1968 Terry v. Ohio decision that facilitated New York City’s controversial “stop-and-frisk” policy, as well as more technical rulings based on esoteric concepts such as “standing,” which has been applied by the court to limit the rights of victims of police misconduct to sue to prevent future misconduct. Other enlightening case studies include Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982), which revised the legal standard for “qualified immunity,” making it more difficult, according to Chemerinsky, to hold police officers responsible for excessive use of force and other civil rights violations. His suggestions for reform include bans on “no-knock” warrants and other dangerous police practices, and a federal law mandating that police departments “record and report all uses of force.” Lucid explanations of constitutional law and Chemerinsky’s deep knowledge of the Supreme Court’s inner workings make this an essential contribution to the debate over police reform. (Aug.)
Los Angeles Review of Books - Laurie L. Levenson
"Opens our eyes to a critical reason that we continue to have problems of police violence and racism in law enforcement... Chemerinsky masterfully presents his arguments by tying together current events with major Supreme Court decisions that laid the foundation for those conflicts... My criminal procedure students know this to be true. They read another book written by Chemerinsky and his co-author that goes through the cases. In the future, they may be assigned this one as well... Years from now, Americans may ask, “Did anyone stand up to the Supreme Court and pull back the curtain?” The answer will be “Yes.” Chemerinsky did just that. Now, it is time for all of us to take a good look."
Thomas J. Davis
"One of the foremost U.S. Constitutional scholars and Supreme Court analysts, Chemerinsky (dean, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Sch. of Law; The Conservative Assault on the Constitution) cogently demonstrates in this book that the court bears much of the blame for police violence and racism in U.S. law enforcement.... An insightful primer for understanding the judicial decisions that support the United States’ prevailing authoritarian, paramilitary, racist approach to policing.... A thoughtful, provocative, and instructive must-read for anyone concerned with justice and domestic tranquility."
Melvin I. Urofsky
"Stunning... Chemerinsky presents a damning indictment of the Supreme Court... As Chemerinsky declares, the court’s record 'from 1986 through the present and likely for years to come, can easily be summarized: ‘The police almost always win....' Aside from the fact that he writes well, Chemerinsky... is also an experienced advocate, having appeared before the court on many occasions, and also having served as a consultant to those police forces who either by choice or necessity have tried to overhaul their practices. He bolsters his argument with examples from his own experiences, and his telling of the cases always starts with the people involved... Chemerinsky details a number of ways state and local governments can and should reform police procedures without having to go to court. Whether the furor unleashed by Black Lives Matter will lead to state and city governments reforming their police departments is yet to be seen, but all lawmakers, in fact all concerned citizens, need to read this book. It is an eloquent and damning indictment not only of horrific police practices, but also of the justices who condoned them and continue to do so."
Library Journal
★ 08/01/2021
One of the foremost U.S. Constitutional scholars and Supreme Court analysts, Chemerinsky (dean, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Sch. of Law; The Conservative Assault on the Constitution), cogently demonstrates in this book that the court bears much of the blame for police violence and racism in U.S. law enforcement. Moving case by case and issue by issue through 19 chapters, he describes how the court has consistently favored unrestrained policing over personal rights. With the brief exception of the 1960s Warren court, conservative justices have weakened or gutted remedies that challenged police misconduct; Chemerinsky says these decisions abandoned the Constitutional safeguards meant to secure the people in their persons and property. This book offers little hope that the current court might shift positions to curtail law enforcement's chronic pattern of brutality and flagrant disregard for Constitutional rights. Chemerinsky instead proposes alternate ways to reform policing: enforcing states' Constitutional safeguards; setting up stricter federal and state restraints; aggressive federal prosecution of police; and, perhaps most important, insistent protests and public pressure on all branches of government. VERDICT Chemerinsky provides an insightful primer for understanding the judicial decisions that support the United States' prevailing authoritarian, paramilitary, racist approach to policing. He points out problems but also lays out steps to overcoming the Supreme Court's consistent failure. A thoughtful, provocative, and instructive must-read for anyone concerned with justice and domestic tranquility.—Thomas J. Davis, Arizona State Univ., Tempe
Kirkus Reviews
2021-06-01
The veteran legal affairs expert offers a powerful attack on a judiciary committed to advancing the police state.
There was little in the way of formal policing in this country until the later 19th century, writes Chemerinsky, who has authored multiple notable books on systemic legal problems in the U.S. Before that, municipalities relied on night watchmen who might occasionally arrest a presumed wrongdoer, a system that “was cheap to administer.” An important consideration is that these police were not subject to the guarantees of the Bill of Rights and later amendments. Instead, the supposition all the way up to the level of the Supreme Court was that only the federal government was bound to honor unreasonable search rules and the like. “For a very brief time in the 1960s,” he writes, “the Warren Court expanded…constitutional rights and sought to significantly limit certain types of police misconduct. But overall the Warren Court was an aberration in American history.” Instead, the court has taken steps to make police immune from being sued for damages, a matter now being tested in the George Floyd case. However, Chemerinsky observes, the very restraints that were used on Floyd were approved by a court ruling in 1983, such that “federal courts cannot hear cases that challenge the chokehold and seek to stop it from being used.” (The logic behind the court’s ruling, writes the author, is particularly contorted.) Even equal protection rules are overlooked while it is statistically inarguable that most police violence is directed toward minorities. “In 2016,” to name just one year, “Black males between fifteen and thirty-four were nine times more likely than other Americans to be killed by law enforcement officers.” Chemerinsky does not join the call to defund law enforcement agencies; he argues the police would merely be privatized to serve the rich. Instead, he suggests that because the Supreme Court will not restrain the police, “state courts can and should invoke state constitutions in order to do so.”
Necessary reading for civil libertarians, public defenders, and activists.
